i5-9400F vs Atom Z670
Primary details
Comparing Atom Z670 and Core i5-9400F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 1094 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 25 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 9.08 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Atom | Intel Core i5 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 8.68 |
| Architecture codename | Lincroft (2010−2011) | Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) |
| Release date | 11 April 2011 (13 years ago) | 8 January 2019 (5 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $75 | $182 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Atom Z670 and Core i5-9400F basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 1 (Single-Core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 6 |
| Base clock speed | 1.5 GHz | 2.9 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.5 GHz | 4.1 GHz |
| Bus type | cDMI | DMI 3.0 |
| Bus rate | 400 MT/s | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | 8 | 29 |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 256K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 9 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 65 mm2 | 149 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 90 °C | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 72 °C |
| Number of transistors | 140 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Atom Z670 and Core i5-9400F compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 (Uniprocessor) | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | T-PBGA518 | FCLGA1151 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 3 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom Z670 and Core i5-9400F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3 | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | - |
| Idle States | + | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | + |
Security technologies
Atom Z670 and Core i5-9400F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| MPX | - | + |
| Identity Protection | - | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® ME |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom Z670 and Core i5-9400F are enumerated here.
| VT-d | - | + |
| VT-x | - | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom Z670 and Core i5-9400F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR2 | DDR4-2666 |
| Maximum memory size | 2.93 GB | 128 GB |
| Max memory channels | 1 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 3.2 GB/s | 42.671 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | PowerVR SGX535 | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Atom Z670 and Core i5-9400F integrated GPUs.
| LVDS | + | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom Z670 and Core i5-9400F.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 16 |
| PCI support | - | no data |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core
Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.
Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.
wPrime 32
wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.
Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 11 April 2011 | 8 January 2019 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 6 |
| Threads | 2 | 6 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 3 Watt | 65 Watt |
Atom Z670 has 2066.7% lower power consumption.
i5-9400F, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 7 years, 500% more physical cores and 200% more threads, and a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Atom Z670 and Core i5-9400F. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Atom Z670 is a notebook processor while Core i5-9400F is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Atom Z670 and Core i5-9400F, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
